Bart Ehrman - The Abnormality of a Conservative Christian Upbringing/Education

I have read and enjoyed a number of biblical historian Bart Ehrman's books which place legitimate history and archaeological evidence over the blind acceptance of the Bible as the "revealed word of God."  It goes without saying that Ehrman is not too popular in Christofascists circles where logic, reason, and true historical inquiry are frowned upon if not outright condemned.  One thing that makes Ehrman interesting is that before he went on to graduate school, he attended Moody Bible Institute which, like so many "Christian" colleges pushed students to embrace ignorance and avoid living in objective reality at all costs.  Ehrman has a post on his blog that looks at the stunted world of Moody Bible College and what is being done even today at such institutions that have no right to be called institutions of learning.  Here are some post highlights:

I do need to spend this final post on the original thread to explain in very brief order what I am resentful about when it comes to my education as a 17-21 year old at Moody.   There are three things, all of which I could expand at length, but since I want to move on to other things, I will make just a few comments on each.

The first has to do with social life.   Moody was a highly regimented environment.  There were all sorts of rules involving social behavior.   Some of these rules were draconian.  here was no chance of having a normal young adulthood there, and I’ve long resented the fact that I missed out on lots of things that are normal, healthy, and important for full social and emotional integration into society.

There could be no drinking (even a beer: drinking age in the country at the time was 18), no drugs, no smoking.  These parts were obvious.  We were also not allowed to dance, to go to movies, or to play cards.  (Seriously: cards are of the devil.)  We were not allowed to have sexual relations of any kind.  Those were reserved for marriage. . . . . By no sexual relations, I not only mean no sexual intercourse.  I mean no sexual contact of any kind, including touching and kissing. 

Second thing: my education.  Or lack of it.  I’ve already mentioned that I was and still am grateful for the massive inundation that I received in the Bible.  I do not say “biblical studies” because there was in fact very, very little scholarship involved.  There was mastery of the Bible.  And of what very conservative evangelical scholars said about the theology of the Bible.   But in terms of academics, there was not much more. These were the years where I should have been, and where I so desperately now wish that I had been, studying in the great disciplines of the humanities and social sciences and hard sciences. . . .

I *should* have been studying the basics of chemistry, biology, and physics.  I had none of that.   I am hugely ignorant as a result.   In addition, I obviously never had courses in cultural anthropology, sociology, or psychology.

I was young and ignorant and was directed there by an older man whom I trusted, when – as I now know — I shouldn’t have trusted him further than I could throw him.   I was passionate for learning about the Bible, and so that’s what I threw myself into.  But how desperately now do I wish I had spent these formative years of my life reading great literature, learning modern languages, studying in depth the Greek and Latin classics, being trained in history, and on and on and on.

The third reason for my resentment is related, and is in a sense the flip side of the coin.   . . . . I am highly resentful of the approach to education taken at Moody.  It was three years of indoctrination.  It was not three years of learning how to think, how to analyze, and to assess, how to evaluate, how to come to one’s own views, how to reason to a conclusion.  It was three years of learning the right answers.   Right answers from within a very narrow and stifling ideological/theological perspective. These right answers were the key to eternal life and earthly happiness.  We simply had to learn the answers and … we would have the answers.   How stupid.  How ignorant.  How mind-numbing.   How mind-killing.   It is not simply that we were not taught how to think or encouraged to think.  We were actively *discouraged* from coming up with our own views, establishing our own perspectives, deriving our own conclusions.  Doing such things was seen as dangerous. 

I did not start learning how to think until I left Moody, and then it took me much longer to learn how to think than normal intelligent human beings take, since I had to drop so much baggage that I had been burdened with.   And this was emotionally difficult, because Moody not only loaded me up with baggage, but the people loading the baggage insisted that the only way to have a happy life and blessed afterlife was to carry that baggage all the way to the end of the road. I don’t feel I started to become fully human until I realized that they were completely wrong, and that their approach to education was, in fact, sinister. 

What Ehrman describes is what is precisely what happens at "christian" schools and colleges and universities - think Regent University of Liberty University among others - every day.   It's not an education but rather indoctrination and brainwashing.  Why such schools and institutions are given accreditation is mind boggling.  Meanwhile children and youth who are forced to attend such institutions are being subjected to a form of child and psychological abuse.  Such places need to lose accreditation sooner as opposed to later.

Life Magazine’s “Homosexuality In America”: 1964.

Over the weekend I was talking to a straight friend of the boyfriend's who asked me if I ever knew that I was gay when I was growing up. I answered "yes and no." Yes, part of my knew the truth, but it was something I simply could not consider acceptable. It was something just too horrible to be true. The consequences were just to terrible. You see, I was 12 years old in 1964 and just at the point of realizing that while many of my male friends were becoming attracted to girls I was feeling attraction to some of my male friends. Being raised in conservative Central New York in a fairly traditional Catholic family, I already pretty much knew that same sex attraction was NOT something that one wanted to be experiencing. And then comes along Life Magazine's lengthy feature story on "Homosexuality in America." Yes, my family subscribed to Life Magazine and I recall seeing the story to my absolute horror. If I had inclinations to stay in the closet and deny who and what I was, this article certainly underscored the need to do so. The message to me and I suspect many other young gays of that era was that we could never, ever, admit to our feelings and that I/we needed to do everything possible to not be one of these people so maligned in the article. Box Turtle Bulletin looks at the piece as does Ronslog.com where the full article can be found. Here are some excerpts from the Life piece which along with Catholic Church brainwashing helped drive me deep into the closet for 37 years:

“Homosexuality shears across the spectrum of American life — the professions, the arts, business and labor. It always has. But today, especially in big cities, homosexuals are discarding their furtive ways and openly admitting, even flaunting, their deviation. Homosexuals have their won drinking places, their special assignation streets, even their own organizations. And for every obvious homosexual, there are probably nine nearly impossible to detect. This social disorder, which society tries to suppress, has forced itself into the public eye because it does present a problem — and parents especially are concerned. The myth and misconception with which homosexuality has so long been clothed must be cleared away, not to condone it but to cope with it.”

Over the next fourteen pages, Life magazine explored what they called the “sordid world” of the gay community. 

 Homosexuals everywhere fear arrest -- and the public exposure that may go with it. In Los Angeles, where homosexuals are particularly apparent on city streets, police drives are regular and relentless. The running battle between police and homosexuals has produced bitter feeling on both sides. Leaders of homophile societies in Los Angeles and San Francisco have accused the police of "harassment, entrapment and brutality" toward homosexuals.

Civil Service regulations – which govern 93 per cent of federal employees – state that a person is unsuitable for government employ if he is guilty of “criminal, infamous, dishonest, immoral or notoriously disgraceful conduct.” The Civil Service Commission maintains that homosexuals can be a disruptive influence in a government agency, that a homosexual in a position of influence is likely to bring other homosexuals into government service, and that where security is necessary they are a greater risk than heterosexual co-workers. When the commission has evidence than an employe or prospective employe is a homosexual, he is denied a job – or fired – for “immoral conduct.”

A Catholic viewpoint, which does not condone homosexuality but does regard it as a psychological problem, has been provided in a book, Counselling the Catholic, written for U.S. parish priests by Father George Hagmaier, C.S.P. and Father Robert Gleason, S.I. The book makes the point that in order to “bring one’s activity into accord with objective morality, one needs knowledge and one needs freedom. A defect in either will ordinarily imply some lessening of responsibility.” The authors conclude that, because they are subjected to this psychological disturbance, homosexuals do not have this freedom.

[I]in Florida early this year the Legislative Investigation Committee’s consideration of homosexuality produced an inflammatory report, calling for tougher laws to support the conclusion that “the problem today is one of control, and that established procedures and stern penalties will serve both as encouragement to law enforcement officials and as a deterrent to the homosexual [who is] hungry for youth.” Its recommendations would make psychiatric examination of offenders mandatory and create a control file on homosexuals which would be available to public employment agencies throughout the state. The report, which included an opening-page picture of two men kissing and photographs of nude men and boys, was so irresponsible that it brought attacks from the Dade County state’s attorney and the Miami Herald, which described it as an “official obscenity.”

You get the drift: why would any youth want to be gay when this is what a national magazine that came into your home every week had to say about gays?  It goes without saying that the years in the closet were damaging for me emotionally and psychologically.   They were no less unkind to those I loved and kept behind a glass wall so that they would never learn my horrible truth.  Finally, it got to the point where I had to either try to face reality or end my own life )something I came close to doing twice).

Christianist Bat Sh*tery in Norfolk School

I never cease to be amazed at the manner in which Christianists - who always always depict themselves as victims of discrimination - ride rough shod over the rights of others. They claim that they should have the right to raise their children according to their religious beliefs but never seem inclined to afford other parents the same courtesy. An example of this insanity is a Norfolk, Virginia, teacher who has resigned (before she was fired) for anointing students with "holy oil" in a religious ritual. This follows the distribution of fetus dolls by an anti-abortion staff in another Norfolk school earlier in the year. The latest incident took place at Jacox Elementary School. Here are highlights from the Virginian Pilot:
*
A Jacox Elementary teacher who anointed students with "holy oil" in the classroom has resigned. School officials say she may have performed inappropriate religious practices during her three years with the division.
*
The fifth-grade teacher is the second educator this year to be investigated for inappropriate religious activities.

Earlier this year, the division conducted an investigation at Oakwood Elementary after teachers told the state that their principal had led staff and students in prayer prior to Standards of Learning testing. Teachers also said they felt pressured by the principal, Sheila Tillett Holas, to attend prayer or Bible sessions before school.
*
At Jacox, a parent complained in early June about the teacher's religious actions, according to a memo sent to the School Board on Wednesday. The memo was obtained by The Virginian-Pilot in response to a Freedom of Information Act request filed July 1.
*
[State] guidelines bar teachers from leading students in devotional activities during classes or school-sponsored activities. Teachers also cannot encourage students to participate with them in religious activity before or after school.

*

Sadly, a number of comments on left on the Pilot article indicate that a number of the loonies in our community see nothing wrong with a Christianist inflicting their views on other citizens and/or their children. I hate to say it, but with Christianists, it is always about them - they are the ones who want special rights.

Say No to Government Funding of Anti-Gay Organizations

As yet another example of how the principally the Republican Party can no longer separate itself from Christianist nutcase causes and as a consequence should be considered first and foremost as a religious party, in Minnesosota GOP Rep. Jim Ramstad (and a misguided Dem. Sen. Amy Klobuchar) is working to land $500,000 in funding for Minnesota Teen Challenge (MNTC), an anti-gay faith-based drug treatment program. One of the requirements of the program is that participants swear off homosexuality. Now, all too typically, the religious organization is unhappy that it is finding itself and it's religious dogma under scrutiny and instead thinks it should have a blank check of taxpayer derived monies. Fortunately, that isn't going to happen as evidenced by this editorial piece in the Minnesota Independent. Here are some highlights:

*

If you accept taxpayer money, you have to accept that you’re going to receive public scrutiny. That simple point seems to be eluding Minnesota Teen Challenge (MNTC), the faith-based drug treatment program which secured a federal earmark in early 2008 arranged by Rep. Jim Ramstad and Sen. Amy Klobuchar, for its “Know the Truth” program which aims to prevent drug use. Operating close to the border of church and state, the group’s members are unrealistic if they think their work is not going to get attention.

*

The point of my article was not to suggest that MNTC was not successful or beneficial, as Scherber implies. Rather it was to point out the overtly religious nature of the organization and that the program has historically been controversial. In the interest of brevity, I left some examples out. For instance, MNTC’s stance on Halloween verges on the comical (”Halloween is a day set up totally for Satan … The more people who go out dressed as demons, ghosts, witches and goblins, the more glory Satan receives”). Scherber’s claim that the Holy Spirit told an MNTC bus driver to avoid the 35-W bridge on the day of its collapse in August 2007 is touching but, let us say, unverified.

*

I think MNTC has been very effective for the clients it serves. However, I don’t think it’s appropriate for judges, prosecutors or public defenders to suggest the program as an alternative to jail. (Szalavitz, by the way, vehemently disagrees with MNTC’s claims about its success rate).

*

One thing is clear. The pressure to keep a positive public image is important to MNTC at this time. As the group’s Web site acknowledges, MNTC invested money in Fidelis Foundation, an institution created by Christian philanthropist Tom Petters, who is now under investigation for organizing a Ponzi scheme and defrauding investors such as the Fidelis Foundation. MNTC lost a lot of money and Klobuchar’s proposed earmark will certainly help ease the burden a little. What else could explain sending form letters to every media outlet that runs an article critical of the organization?

*

As I have argued repeatedly, a group's freedom of religion stops the moment it starts accepting public, taxpayer derived funds. If the organization cannot operate in a manner that does not trample on the religious freedom of others or which does not involve indoctrination of a set religious view, then the solution is simple: do not accept taxpayer derived funds. It's that simple.